Postharvest Ripening and Shelf Life of Mango (Mangifera Indica L.) Fruit As Influenced by 1-Methylcyclopropene and Polyethylene Packaging

Ethiop. J. Agric. Sci.
22:26-44 (2012)
Postharvest Ripening and Shelf Life of Mango

(Mangifera indica L.) Fruit as Influenced by
1-Methylcyclopropene and Polyethylene Packaging
Lemma Ayele1 , Kebede W/Tsadik2, Kebede Abegaz3, and Senayit Yetneberk1
1Melkassa Agricultural Research Center, P.O. Box 436, Nazareth, Ethiopia 2Haramaya
University, P.O. Box 138, Dire Dawa, Ethiopia 3Hawassa University,

P.O. Box 5, Hawassa, Ethiopia1
Abstract
The mango (Mangifera indica L.) is a climacteric and highly perishable fruit
that requires specialized postharvest handling to extend its storage life. The
study was undertaken at Melkassa Agricultural Research Center (MARC) to
evaluate the influence of 1-Methylcyclopropene (1-MCP) and polyethylene
packaging (PP) on postharvest storage of mango. Fruits of two mango cultivars
namely ‘Apple’ and ‘Kent’ were harvested at green-mature stage and were
treated with gaseous 1-MCP (100 or 500 nLL-1) in closed plastic containers for
18 hours and then individual fruits were either packaged with perforated
polyethylene bags or kept without packaging. They were stored up to 21 days
under ambient condition at temperature of 25.7 ±2.6oC and relative humidify of
66.1±11.8%. Treatments were laid out in factorial arrangement in RCBD with
three replications. The physiological weight loss (PWL), peel color change,
firmness, juice content, total soluble solids (TSS) and titratable acidity (TA)
were significantly (p<0.01) affected by 1-MCP treatment and polyethylene
packaging throughout the storage periods. The 1-MCP treated and packaged
fruits showed better performance in all physiological ripening qualities as
compared to 1-MCP untreated and non-packaged fruits. The 1-MCP treatment
and polyethylene packaging significantly reduced PWL. These treatments
maintained better mango fruit quality in terms of firmness, juice content and
TSS of mangoes. Thus, the result clearly showed that 1-MCP treatment and
polyethylene packaging at ambient condition can extend storage life and
maintain quality of mango fruits for about nine and six days, respectively.
Therefore, 1-MCP treatment and polyethylene packaging can be used separately
or together to extend storage life and maintain quality of mango fruits for
remarkable days. Therefore, 1-MCP and PP can be used singly or combined to
extend the shelf life and maintain quality of mango fruit for weeks on ambient
storage condition.
Key words: Mango Fruits, 1-Methylecyclopropene, Polyethylene Packaging,

Quality, Storage Period
Postharvest Ripening and Shelf Life of Mango (Mangifera indica L.) [27]
Introduction
The mango (Mangifera indica L.) is a tropical evergreen fruit tree commercially grown
in many countries and popular both in the fresh and the processed forms (Mukherjee,
1997, Mitra and Bildwin, 1997). It is one of the most popular fruits of the world,
because of its attractive color, delicious taste and excellent nutritional properties (Rice
et al., 1990). Among fruits cultivated in different Regional States of Ethiopia, mango is
preceded only by banana; and the first in Gambela and Southern Ethiopia Regions
(Edossa et al., 2006). In 2008, the total area of production under small holders and
production was estimated about 6.1 thousand hectares and 0.44 million metric ton,
respectively (CSA, 2008).
Mangoes are classified as climacteric fruit and ripen quite rapidly after harvest
(Mitra, 1997). Mango is very delicate and perishable fruit, highly susceptible to post
harvest disease, extreme temperature and physical injuries (Kays, 1991). The general
perishable nature of the fruit, sensitivity to low storage temperatures and disease
problems limit transport distances of fresh fruits from production farms to markets
(Mitra and Bildwin, 1997). The postharvest loss of some tropical fruits in the state
farms and peasant sectors in Ethiopia was up to 49.2 %, due to handling (Kader, 2009).
The development of technologies to extend postharvest life would require
approaches aimed at inhibiting ethylene action which is known to involve in the
induction of ripening or retarding process have already been initiated before harvest
(Lizada, 1991). The 1-Methylcycloprorene (1-MCP) is known to regulate both
respiration and ethylene effects in many fruits which are known to be climacteric
(Sisler and Serek, 2003). This product has been recognized as an ethylene action
inhibitor that could block ethylene perception, preventing adverse ethylene responses
in plant tissues for extended periods (Feng et al., 2000). Mango is among the crops
registered for 1-MCP treatment (Watkins, 2006). Modified Atmosphere Packaging
(MAP), on the other hand, has been reported to affect postharvest quality of mango
(Silva et al. 2004; Alye, 2005). According to Alye (2005) packaged fruits showed
reduced physiological weight loss, higher pH, lower titratable acids and higher total
sugar content than non-packed mango fruits.
Nowadays, 1-MCP is widely used through out the world. However, in Ethiopia,
there is limited information and experience in the post harvest handling of mangoes
in general and the use of 1-MCP, in particular, as postharvest treatment to extend the
shelf life of mangoes. So far, there are no experiments conducted to assess the
influence of 1-MCP on mango cultivars growing in Ethiopia. Therefore, the present
study was initiated with the aim to evaluate separate or combined effect of 1-MCP
and polyethylene packaging on postharvest ripening, shelf life and quality of mango
fruits.
[28] Lemma Ayele et. al.
Materials and Methods

Experimental site
The experiment was carried out at Melkassa Agricultural Research Center (MARC)
which is located at latitude 8o4’ N and longitude 39o21’ E and 115 km Southeast of
Addis Ababa. The experiment site is situated at an altitude of 1550 masl and it is
characterized by mean annual rainfall of 763 mm of which about 70% precipitates
from June to September. Mean maximum and minimum temperature are 28.4oC and
14.0oC, respectively (MARC, 2007).
Treatments and experimental design

The experiment was conducted between July and August 2009. Two mango cultivars
(‘Apple’ and ‘Kent’) were used to investigate the effect of 1-Methylcyclopropene (1-
MCP) and polyethylene packaging (PP). A randomized complete block design
(RCBD) with three replications was used and the treatments were arranged in a
factorial scheme. The experiment followed 3*2*2 factorial arrangement, with three
levels of 1-MCP (100, 500 nLL-1 and a control/without 1-MCP); two levels of PP
(packaged and non-packaged) and two mango varieties (‘Apple’ and ‘Kent’).
Experimental procedures
Sample Preparation
The fruits were harvested at mature-green stage and carried out with care to minimize
mechanical injuries. Fruits were collected in plastic box and were placed under shade,
for about two hours, until transported to the horticulture laboratory of MARC.
Uniform fruits with similar size and color were selected and hand washed with tap
water to remove field heat, clear dust particles and to reduce microbial population
that might be present on the fruit surface.
Treating With 1-MCP

Fruits were labeled and then grouped into three lots and each lot was kept in three
large plastic containers, with a tight lid and with capacity of 330 liters, for 1-MCP
treatment. The fruits were treated according to the procedures described by Fan et al.
(1999). The formulated 1-MCP (Lupo FreshTM, Vankor Ltd., China) was uniformly
distributed by shaking the solution. Then, the button was pressed to spray the
solution in the free space for fumigation for 6 seconds and 30 seconds to have 100 nLL-
1 and 500 nLL-1 1-MCP concentrations, respectively. The plastic containers were closed
tightly immediately after 1-MCP application and kept for 18 hours at ambient
conditions.
Packaging
A low-density perforated PP with the thickness of 7.5 µm (Ethiopia plastic S.C.) was
used to package individual mango fruits. Up on removal from sealed containers,
about 50% of mango fruits were packaged and the other half were left without
packaging.
Data collection
Samples of two mango fruits were randomly taken at a time from each treatment for
physiological and physico-chemical quality assessment. Data collection started at
sixth date of storage and then in every three days interval. The following data were
collected.
Physiological weight loss of fruit

Weight of sample fruits were measured and recorded using precision scale (Sartorius
GMBH Gottingen, Germany, model LS200). Physiological weight loss (PWL) was
determined using the formula: Weight loss (%) = [(Initial weight – Final
weight)/Initial weight] x 100
Peel color
Ripening of fruits were visually assessed by skin color and scored by experienced
sensory panelists, based on specific cultivar color, using a 1 to 6 scale which represent
six ripening stages of mango fruits as described by Silva et al. (2004). The six ripening
stages were represented as 1 = totally green; 2 = <25 % color change; 3 = 25-50 % color
change; 4 = >50 % but <100 % color change; 5 = 100 % color change; and 6 = color with
many black spots. A color chart was used to support the visual or sensory
observation.
Firmness
Firmness of mango fruits from different treatments was assessed using a texture
analyzer (TA.XT.Plus, Stable Micro Systems Ltd., UK). Whole mango fruits were
measured for maximum penetrating force using 4 mm diameter stainless cylinder
probe rig attachment at a cross-head speed of 0.5 mm per second for a maximum
penetration distance of 10 mm. The force required to penetrate were automatically
recorded by software installed.
Juice content
Juice content of mango fruits was determined according to the procedure described by
Lacey, et al. (2001). Weight of sample fruits were measured and recorded using
precision scale and then the flesh part of the sample fruits were extracted and their
weight were recorded. Percentage of juice content was determined by the formula:
Juice content (%) = (Flesh weight / Fruit weight) x100
Fruit marketability
The descriptive quality attributes were determined subjectively by observing the
surface appearance characteristics such as smoothness or shininess, shriveling or
dehydration, and the level of visible mould growth. Shiny mango fruits without
shriveling, rotting and free of black spots were considered as marketable fruits and
calculated as follows:
Percentage marketability = Number of marketable fruits x100

Total number of fruits
Total soluble solids

Mango juice was extracted from the sample fruits and blended using juice blender
(New Harteford, Waring Commercial, USA). Total soluble solids (TSS) of mango juice
was measured by a portable hand Refractometer (Miscor, Japan) with a range of 0 to
30o Birx and resolutions of 0.2. The oBrix reading was used to determine TSS by
placing 1 to 2 drops of clear juice on the prism of the Refractometer. Between samples
reading, the prism of the Refractometer was washed with distilled water and dried
with a tissue paper.
Titratable acidity
Mango juice was extracted from the sample fruits and blended using juice blender
(New Hharteford, Waring Commercial, USA). Titratable acidity (TA) was determined
according to procedures described by Nielsen (2003) using digital titration instrument
(Jencons Digitrate, UK). Mango juice (10 ml) was diluted with 20 ml distilled water
and then five drops of phenolphthalein were added as an indicator. It was titrated
with 0.1N NaOH until the indicator changed pink and then the titrate volume of
NaOH was recorded. The TA, expressed as citric acid (with equivalent weight of
64.04) using the following formula.
% Acid = (ml NaOH) x (N of the base in mol/liter) x (Eq. wt. of acid)

(Sample volume in ml) x 10
Statistical analysis
Analysis of variance (ANOVA) was performed to determine differences between the
treatments with factorial arrangement in RCBD (Gomez and Gomez, 1984). The
results were analyzed with Statistical Analysis System (SAS) soft ware version 8 (SAS
2002). Comparisons of the treatment means was done by the least significant
difference (LSD) test at 5% significance level. Data on interaction of treatment factors
is only presented when significant and left for insignificant combinations.
Results and Discussion
Physiological weight loss

Physiological Weight Loss (PWL) of mango fruits were affected significantly by both
1-MCP treatment and polyethylene packaging throughout the storage periods.
Interaction effects were non-significant (p>0.05) for PWL of mango fruits. The 1-MCP
affected mango fruits significantly (p<0.01) in reducing PWL (Table 1). Mango fruits
treated with 1-MCP showed lower percentage PWL as compared to the fruits stored
without 1-MCP treatment. The maximum PWL (9.98%) were recorded for 1-MCP
untreated fruits on 21st days while PWL for mangoes treated with 100 nL.L-1 and 500
nL.L-1 1-MCP were 6.54% and 5.42%, respectively. This reduction in PWL is most
probably because of the property of 1-MCP that blocks the action of ethylene which
has a direct relation with respiration and fruit ripening (Sisler and Serek, 2003). The
result is in line with observations of Silva et al. (2004) who reported that mango fruits
treated with 1-MCP showed reduced weight loss as compared to non-treated control
in two mango cultivars. However, non-significant difference (p>0.05) was observed
between 100 nL.L-1 and 500 nL.L-1 1-MCP concentration treatments which might
indicate that its effectiveness in blocking the receptors of ethylene at low
concentration as stated by Sisler and Serek (1997).
The PP also showed significant difference (p<0.01) in reducing PWL throughout
the storage periods. Packaged fruits were with lower PWL as compared to the non-
packaged fruits (Table 1). Higher PWL were recorded on 18th day of storage for non-
packaged mango fruits with maximum value, 12.34%. On the same date of storage,
PWL for packaged mangoes were only 3.93%. Higher relative humidity and modified
atmosphere created within the package were possible causes for significant reduction
of PWL for packaged mango fruits. Wills et al. (1998) stated that faster air movement
around fruits may result in higher water loss. The result agrees with reports of many
researchers (Cocozza et al., 2004; Silva et al.; 2004, Alye, 2005). Such effect of MAP is
possibly through depletion of oxygen and release of carbon dioxide in the sealed
plastic packaging free space (Be-Yehoshua et al., 1985) when the fruits are ripening.
Generally, PWL increased with storage time throughout the storage period. The
minimum weight losses were recorded at the beginning of each storage period while
the maximum values were towards the end of storage (Table 1). This phenomenon
was also reported by Zeweter (2008).
Table 1. Physiological weight loss (%) of mango fruits as affected by 1-MCP and polyethylene packaging (PP)
Treatments Storage period on days

.
6 9 12 15 18 21
1-MCP(nLL-1) 0 2.84a 6.29a 7.60a 8.96a 9.74a 9.98
100 1.81b 4.49b 6.02b 6.96b 7.40b 6.54
500 1.81b 4.14b 5.78b 6.8b 7.27b 5.42
LSD* 0.59 0.92 0.90 1.36 0.69 4.73
PP
Packaged 1.58b 2.24b 2.62b 3.38b 3.93b 7.31
Unpackaged 4.73a 7.72a 10.31a 11.77a 12.34a -
LSD* 0.48 0.75 0.74 1.11 0.56 3.86 -

Cultivars ‘Apple’ 3.38 5.06 6.25 7.50 7.70 9.197
‘Kent’ 2.93 4.89 6.68 7.65 8.58 5.437
LSD* 0.48 0.75 0.74 1.11 0.56
SE 0.49 1.18 1.14 2.59 2.59 13.56
CV (%) 12.16 11.83 9.55 11.23 10.12 18.33
Note: Mean separation was done for each treatment at every storage periods; and treatments with the same letters
are not significantly different.
*Least significant different at 5% level
Peel Color
Peel color change of mango fruits was significantly affected (p<0.01) by both 1-MCP
treatment and polyethylene packaging throughout the storage periods. There was also
significant interaction effect between PP and cultivars (p<0.05) on 6th storage day
(Figure 1). 'Kent' was with higher color stage for non-packaged mango fruits while its
packaged fruits were with lower peel color change (Figure 2). This might indicate that
color change in 'Kent' mango responds fast under polyethylene packaging. Silva et al.
(2004) reported that mango cultivars varied in their response to some postharvest
treatments.
*1 = totally green; 2 = <25 % color change; 3 = 25-50 % color change; 4 = >50 % but <100 % color change; 5 = 100
% color change; and 6 = color with wide (many) black spot
Figure 1. The interaction effect between polyethylene packaging and mango cultivars for color
change of mangoes
The 1-MCP treatment showed significant difference (p<0.01) throughout the storage
periods with regard to peel color change. Treatment with 1-MCP resulted in better
color maintenance for all cultivars (Table 2). Mangoes without 1-MCP treatment
reached around 100% color change on 9th day of storage while 1-MCP treated mango
fruits reached this full color change at 18th day of storage. On the 18th day, 1-MCP non-
treated mangoes peel showed many black spots where as the 1-MCP treated mangoes
attained full color change with good appearance. Silva et al. (2004) reported that 1-
MCP treatment effectively maintained the external appearance and reduced rate of
color change for both cultivars they tested.
a) b
Figure 2. Color difference observed on 9th day of storage for ‘Apple’ mango fruits subjected
to 1-MCP treatment (a) and polyethylene packaging (b)
The PP significantly affected (p<0.01) color change of mango fruits throughout storage
periods. Packaged mangoes showed delay in color development than those of non-
packaged ones (Table 2). Full color change was observed on 12th day of storage for
non-packaged fruits and 18th day for packaged mangoes. The non-packaged fruits
have access to O2 to increase in concentration of ethylene which may enhanced
respiration (Wills et al., 1998). They showed rapid change in color from green to
yellow, faster than the polyethylene packaged fruits. The observed delay in color
change of packaged mango fruits as compared to non-packaged fruits might be due to
retarded respiration as a result of modified atmosphere (O2 depletion and CO2
accumulation) in the packaging materials (Be-Yehoshua et al., 1985). In line with the
present result, a report of Cocozza et al. (2004) also show that MAP delayed skin color
changes in ‘Tommy Atkins’ mangoes.
Table 2. Peel color change of mango fruits subjected to 1-MCP treatment and polyethylene packaging (PP)

6 9 12 15 18 21
1-MCP (nLL-1) 0 3.97a 4.63a 5.43a 5.76a 5.88a 6.21a
100 2.27b 3.35b 3.91b 4.24b 5.53b 6.01b
500 2.20b 3.11b 3.91b 4.20b 5.58b 5.93b
LSD** 0.37 0.33 0.26 0.16 0.21 0.19
PP Packaged 2.31b 3.35b 4.00b 4.85b 5.30b 6.22
Unpackaged 3.32a 4.04a 4.84a 5.42a 5.99a -
LSD** 0.30 0.27 0.21 0.13 0.08 -
Cultivars ‘Apple’ 2.70 3.66 4.42 5.08 5.56 6.31a
‘Kent’ 2.93 3.73 4.42 5.18 5.60 6.13b
LSD** 0.30 0.27 0.21 0.13 0.08 0.15
SE 0.19 0.15 0.09 0.03 0.012 0.02
CV (%) 8.62 10.72 7.14 11.34 2.00 2.37
are not significantly different
* 1 = totally green; 2 = <25 % color change; 3 = 25-50 % color change; 4 = >50 % but <100 % color change; 5 = 100
% color change; and 6 = color with wide
(many) black spots
**Least significant different at 5% level
Firmness
The 1-MCP treatment, polyethylene packaging and cultivars significantly affected
(p<0.01) firmness of mango fruits throughout the storage periods. Interaction effects
were non-significant (p>0.05) for firmness of mango fruits. Mango fruits treated with
1-MCP required more force to penetrate as compared to untreated once (Table 3). This
indicates that the 1-MCP has inhibition action on ethylene and hence delayed ripening
process. As noted by Mattheis et al (2003), 1-MCP binds irreversibly to ethylene
receptors and ripening of treated fruit will be delayed until new binding site is
synthesized which could explain results observed in this study. However, the two 1-
MCP treatment levels showed non-significant difference for fruit firmness, showing
that 1-MCP effectively block the ripening action of ethylene at low concentrations.
Silva et al. (2004) also stated that 1-MCP was effective at lower concentrations such as
100 nLL-1.
The PP also resulted in significant difference (p<0.01) throughout the storage
periods for fruit firmness. Packaged mango fruits needed higher force to penetrate
indicating that they were firmer than non-packaged ones. For instance, force required
to penetrate fruits from PP fruits on day 15 of storage was 15.52 N but only 10.96 N
was required to penetrate fruits from non-packaged (Table 3). The effect of
polyethylene bag in delaying loss of firmness could be due to modified atmosphere
created within the packaging free space which may show influence to reduced rate of
respiration (Zagory and Kader, 1988). Similar effect of polyethylene packaging was
observed on banana fruits (Zeweter, 2008). In line with the present result, Cocozza et
al. (2004) also reported that the application of 100 nL.L-1 and 500 nL.L-1 1-MCP
associated to MA maintained fruits firmness by 25% than the control.
In most of storage periods, significant differences (p<0.01) were observed with
regard to firmness among mango cultivars. ‘Apple’ mango was firmer than ‘Kent’
(Table 3). The observed difference between the mango varieties indicate that cultivars
might differ in firmness genetically. This could be due to variation in physiological
and physical characteristics among cultivars such as skin thickness. Jiang and Joyce
(2000) described that positive effects of packaging in delaying ripening and maintain
harvested product quality vary with plant genetic, physiological and morphological
characteristics.
Generally, the force needed to penetrate the fruits decreased with storage time
indicated that firmness of mangoes decreases ripening (Table 3). The steady reduction
in fruit firmness during storage period is a natural process of ripening of almost all
fleshy fruits as a result of biochemical changes of the cellular structure (Brady, 1987).
That could be the reason for the observed reduction in firmness of mango fruits
subjected to all treatments during storage time.
Table 3. Force (N) required to penetrate mango fruits treated by 1-MCP and polyethylene packaging (PP)
6 9 12 15 18 21
1-MCP (nLL-1) 0 14.79b 15.14b 13.98b 11.75b 10.39b 8.45b
100
20.09a 20.20a 16.47a 15.60a 15.39a 14.23a
500 21.49a 21.64a 17.92a 16.03a 15.67a 15.92a
LSD* 2.18 1.95 1.79 1.58 1.21 4.75
PP Packaged 21.66a 21.58a 18.16a 16.41a 15.90a 12.86
Unpackaged 15.92b 16.41b 14.09b 12.52b 12.41b -
LSD* 1.78 1.59 1.46 1.29 3.33 -

Cultivars ‘Apple’ 22.23a 22.12a 17.23a 15.95a 15.19 15.14a
‘Kent’ 15.35b 15.86b 15.02b 12.97b 13.81 10.59b
LSD* 1.78 1.59 1.46 1.29 3.33 3.88
SE 0.66 0.53 0.44 0.35 1.89 1.36
CV (%) 7.74 6.14 7.15 5.93 8.00 8.73
are not significantly different. *Least significant difference at 5% level
Juice Content
Juice content of mango fruits was significantly affected (p<0.01) by 1-MCP treatment,
polyethylene packaging and cultivars throughout the storage periods. There was also
significant interaction between PP and the cultivars on 15th day storage period
(p<0.01) for juice content of mango fruits. Figure 3 shows the positive effect of
packaging in keeping higher juice content of mango fruits in general and interaction
between PP and mango cultivars on some storage days in particular. For non-
packaged mangoes, 'Apple' mango showed higher juice content than 'Kent' but
packaged 'Kent' mango fruits had higher juice content as compared to that of 'Apple'.
As described above, ‘Kent’ responded better for packaging as compared to ‘Apple’
mango. Positive effects of 1-MCP in delaying ripening vary with plant genetic,
physiological and morphological characteristics (Sisler and Seker, 1997).
100
a
80 b
Juice content (%)
c
d
60
40
20
0
Non-packaged Packaged
Apple Kent
Figure 3. The interaction effect between polyethylene packaging and cultivars for mango for juice content
The 1-MCP treatment resulted in significant differences (p<0.01) for juice content of
mangoes throughout the storage periods. The 1-MCP treated maintained higher juice
content as compared to 1-MCP-untreated ones (Table 4). Zagory and Kader (1988)
reported that 1-MCP has a negative effect on ethylene actions and hence delays
respiration loss. Juice content of mango fruits decreased throughout the storage
periods due to PWL increases with storage time.
Table 4. Percentage juice content of mango fruits treated by 1-MCP and polyethylene packaging (PP)

.
6 9 12 15 18 21
1-MCP 0
(nLL-1) 70.9b 66.86c 67.82b 60.84b 60.42b 59.37b
100 76.2a 71.16b 70.69ab 68.45a 64.65ab 71.90a
500 77.19a 74.44a 74.47a 70.68a 68.81a 73.59a
LSD* 2.16 2.86 3.81 5.01 5.57 9.85
LSD* 1.76 2.33 3.11 4.09 4.55 -
Cultivars ‘Apple’ 74.43 69.67 71.16 66.58 64.07 69.47
‘Kent’ 75.17 71.96 7.0.82 66.73 65.18 67.10
LSD* 1.76 2.33 3.11 4.09 4.55 8.04
SE 6.53 5.43 4.28 5.05 4.39 5.67
CV (%) 3.41 4. 77 6.34 8.88 10.19 11.21
Fruit Marketability
Marketability of mango fruits was significantly affected (p<0.01) by both 1-MCP
treatment and polyethylene packaging throughout the storage periods. There was also
significant interaction effect between 1-MCP and PP for marketability of mango fruits
from 9th to 18th storage days. As displayed in Figure 4, generally packaging showed
increase percentage marketable fruits both for 1-MCP-treated and untreated mango
fruits. However, the rate of increase was significantly higher for untreated ones. This
may show that 1-MCP-treated fruits already attain higher percentage even without
packaging. However, marketability further maintained by using packaging together
with 1-MCP treatment rather than applying each of the postharvest treatments alone
(Zeweter, 2008).
LSD=2.46
100
Marketeblity (%)
a a
80 b b
c
60 d
40
20
0
Non-packaged Packaged
0 100 nLL-1 500 nLL-1 (1-MCP)
Figure 4. Interaction effect among postharvest treatment for marketability of mango fruits
Both 1-MCP treatment and PP showed significant differences (p<0.01) for all cultivars
on percentage marketable fruits (Table 5). At the early days of storage, it was
observed that percentage marketable fruit was almost similar to mangoes subjected to
all treatments. But in the later storage periods, 1-MCP treated fruits resulted in higher
marketable fruits. The 1-MCP, which has a competitive effect with ethylene for
receptors, (Feng et al., 2000) might decreased rate of respiration and hence slowed
down senescence.
The PP showed a greater effect in keeping higher percentage of marketable
mango fruits during storage. Ben-Yenoshua et al. (1985) reported that sealing
individual climacteric fruit in low-density polyethylene bag delayed ripening and
softening, and hence improved marketability. The low relative humidity around non-
packaged fruits could be the main cause for rapid deterioration of the fruits due to
moisture loss, which result in shriveled and brownish fruits. Moreover, the effect of
polyethylene could partially be due to the possible difference in air composition
around the fruits that might suppress respiration.
Table 5. Marketability of mango fruits (%) as affected by 1-MCP and polyethylene packaging (PP)
Treatments Storage period (days)
6 9 12 15 18 21
1-MCP (nLL-1) 0 97.75b 83.50b 72.00b 58.16b 40.33a 29.50b
100 100.00a 94.83a 88.75a 82.91a 75.83a 70.29a
500 100.00a 95.83a 92.33a 88.41a 83.66a 79.45a
LSD* 1.18 3.33 5.32 7.03 9.05 11.09
PP Packaged 100.00a 94.33a 88.38a 82.11a 73.77a 67.63a
Unpackaged 97.88b 88.44b 80.33b 70.88b 59.44b 51.87b
LSD* 0.96 2.72 4.35 5.74 7.39 9.05
Cultivars ‘Apple’ 99.00 90.61 83.72 75.27 65.16 57.52
‘Kent’ 99.77 92.16 85.00 77.72 68.05 61.98
LSD* 0.96 2.72 4.35 5.74 7.39 9.05
SE 1.95 15.50 39.60 69.08 114.42 171.74
CV (%) 1.40 4.30 7.45 10.86 16.05 21.93
*Least significant difference at 5% level
Total Soluble Solids

Total soluble solids (TSS) of mango fruits was significantly affected (p<0.01) by 1-
MCP treatment, polyethylene packaging and cultivars throughout the storage periods.
There was also significant interaction effect (p<0.05), for TSS, between the packaging
and mango cultivars on some storage days. Packaging affected non-significantly for
'Apple' mango while it showed significant effect on 'Kent' mango (Figure 5). This may
indicate that packaging was more effective to 'Kent' than 'Apple' mango for delaying
fruit ripening.
Figure 5. Interaction effect between polyethylene packaging and cultivars for mango total soluble solids
The 1-MCP treatment significantly affected TSS value (p<0.01) of throughout the
storage period. Mango fruits that treated with 1-MCP showed lower TSS as compared
to untreated mangoes (Table 6). This indicated that fruit ripening process had
retarded by 1-MCP action. Jiang and Joyce (2000) stated effect of 1-MCP could be
associated with an apparent delay in the onset of elevated ethylene evolution and
respiration. This result is in agreement with the report of Zeweter (2008) in which 1-
MCP treatment for banana fruits delayed the increase of TSS as well as onset of
several physiological responses related to ripening that could extend the shelf life of
the fruits with better quality maintenance. Mango is a climacteric fruit having a
tendency to have increased soluble solid concentration until a maximum is reached at
full ripe stage and showed slight reduction towards senescence stage (Durigan et al.,
2004). This fact was observed in the present investigation as demonstrated in Table 6.
The maximum TSS value which indicate the full ripeness of fruits reached on 12th day
and 21st day for 1-MCP untreated and treated mangoes, respectively. The result
clearly showed that 1-MCP treatment delayed ripening period of mango fruits by
about 9 days as compared to untreated fruits.
The PP was also resulted in significant difference (p<0.01) for TSS of mango fruits.
Packaged fruits also maintained at lower TSS values as compared to non-packaged
fruits (Table 6). Thus, packaging retarded ripening process. Non-packaged fruits
reached the highest TSS values (20.47) on 12th day of storage; whereas polyethylene
packaged fruits reached maximum TSS value (18.70) on 18th days (Table 6). The result
indicated that PP delayed the ripening period of mango fruits at least by 6 days. Alye
(2005) also obtained similar result. Inline with the current investigation, Zagory and
Kader (1988) also reported that the role of MAP was primarily to reduce respiration
rate of fruit and vegetables. Reduced respiration also retards softening and slowdown
various compositional changes such as TSS, which are associated with ripening. The
observed fast increment in TSS of fruits stored without packaging may indicate higher
respiration rate and ripening. Brady (1987) stated that higher respiration result in fast
ripening rate and then quality deterioration with the onset of senescence.
There was significant difference (p<0.01) for TSS of the mango varieties fruits; and
‘Kent’ mango showed the highest TSS during most of storage periods. As described
earlier, this difference among mango cultivars indicate mango cultivars varied in
sweetness might be due to difference in genetic and physiological characteristics.
Table 6. Total soluble solids (oBrix) of mango fruits as affected by 1-MCP and polyethylene packaging (PP)
Treatments Total soluble solids (oBrix)
6 9 12 15 18 21
1-MCP (nLL-1)
0 12.43a 20.04a 20.48a 20.31a 14.77c 15.66c
100 11.59b 17.00b 18.27b 18.65b 19.99a 20.02a
500 11.10b 16.31b 16.66b 17.43b 18.16b 18.96b
LSD* 0.82 1.25 0.60 0.54 1.07 1.65
PP Packaged 10.54b 16.22b 17.37b 18.81b 18.70b 16.83
Unpackag 12.87a 19.35a 20.47a 19.78a 19.46a -
ed
LSD* 0.67 1.02 0.49 0.44 0.75 -
Cultivars ‘Apple’ 10.73b 18.95a 17.88b 17.96b 18.66b 16.11b
‘Kent’ 12.68a 16.61b 20.38a 19.83a 19.27a 17.55a
‘TN185’ - - - - - -
LSD* 0.67 1.02 0.49 0.44 0.75 1.35
SE 0.95 2.20 0.50 0.42 0.96 1.65
CV (%) 8.34 8.34 3.72 3.37 5.28 7.65
Titratable Acidity
Titratable acidity (TA) of mango fruits was significantly affected (p<0.01) by 1-MCP
treatment, polyethylene packaging and cultivars throughout the storage periods.
Interaction effects were non-significant (p>0.05) for TA of mango fruits. Mango fruits
subjected to 1-MCP treatment showed significantly higher TA content as compared to
untreated mangoes. The highest TA value (1.89) was recorded for 1-MCP treated
mango fruits, at 100 nLL-1 dose, on 6th storage day while the least TA value (0.71) was
recorded for mango fruits without 1-MCP treatment on 18th day (Table 7). The
concentrations of these acids are known to diminish during ripening (Medlicott et al.,
1988). The 1-MCP treated mango fruits maintained high TA as compared to the
control throughout the storage periods. Kader (1992) stated that higher fruit acidity
due to postharvest treatments that delay respiration could be result of reduced
utilization rate of respiratory substrates (such as organic acids).
The PP also significantly affected (p<0.01) the changes in TA of mangoes during
storage periods. Packaged fruits showed higher TA as compared to the non-packaged
ones throughout the storage period (Table 7). For instance, TA value on 6th and 18th
day for polyethylene packaged mangoes were 1.87 and 1.32; while TA values for non-
packaged mango fruits on respective days were 1.37 and 0.99.
In general, the values of TA were highest at earlier stage of storage indicating
that unripe fruits are more acidic than ripen ones; and hence ripening of mangoes
resulted in fall of acidity. The result is in line with Cocozza et al. (2004) and Silva et al.
(2004) reports.
Table 7. Titratable acidity (%) of mango fruits as affected by 1-MCP and polyethylene packaging (PP)
Treatments Titratable acidity (%)
6 9 12 15 18 21
1-MCP (nLL-1)
0 1.34c 0.86b 0.59c 0.88b 0.71b 1.06b
100 1.63b 1.12a 0.79b 1.22a 1.17a 1.39ab
500 1.89a 1.21a 0.87a 1.35a 1.15a 1.61a
LSD* 0.23 0.17 0.06 0.18 0.26 0.34
LSD* 0.19 0.13 0.04 0.15 0.22 -

Cultivars ‘Apple’ 1.71 1.09 0.75 1.03b 1.12 0.89b
‘Kent’ 1.52 1.03 0.75 1.27a 1.01 1.82a
‘TN185’ - - - - - -
LSD* 0.19 0.13 0.04 0.15 0.22 0.28
SE 0.07 0.04 0.01 0.05 0.08 0.07
CV (%) 7.12 5.83 4.45 6.33 8.01 7.93
As a summery, both 1-MCP treatment and polyethylene packaging showed significant

effect on mango fruits for all ripening and quality parameters considered. The 1-MCP
treated and packaged fruits were resulted in lower PWL, firmer, better color
maintenance, higher juice content and higher in percent marketable fruits for all
cultivars tested. The result clearly showed that 1-MCP treatment extended ripening
period by nine days under ambient storage condition of high temperature area like
Melkassa. This improvement in ripening and quality of mango fruits was most
probably because of the property of 1-MCP that blocks the action of ethylene which
has a direct relation with respiration and fruit ripening. On other hand, polyethylene
packaging retained fruit quality and extended ripening period of mango fruits by at
least six days under ambient storage conditions. Such effect of MAP is possibly
through depletion of oxygen and release of carbon dioxide in the sealed plastic
packaging. Postharvest life and marketability further improved by using packaging
along with 1-MCP treatment rather than applying each of the treatments alone.
Further investigation may be needed on economic analysis, determining 1-MCP rate
for different cultivars of mango and the effect of other packaging materials on
postharvest life of mango.
References
Alye Tefera. 2005. Effect of disinfection, packaging, and evaporative cooling storage
on shelf life of Mango (Mangifera indica L.). M.Sc. Thesis. Alemaya University,
Ethiopia.
Ben-Yehoshua, S. 1985. Individual seed packaging of fruits and vegetables in plastic
film: New postharvest technique. J Hort. Sci. 20:32-37.
Brady, C.J. 1987. Fruit ripening. Ann. Rev. Plant Physiol. 38:155-178.
Cocozza, F.M., Jorge, J.T., Alve, R.E., Filigveeiras, H.A.C. and Pereira, M.E.C. 2004.
Respiration rate and chemical characteristics of cold stored “Tommy Atkins’
mangoes influenced by 1-MCP and modified atmosphere packaging. Proceedings
of 7th International Mango Symposium, Acta Hort. 645,645-650.
CSA (Central Statistical Agency). 2008. Statistical bulletin of agricultural sample
survey. Report on area and production of crops.
Edossa Etissa, Lemma Ayele. and Dereje Tadesse. 2006. Review on the status of some
tropical fruits in Ethiopia. Preceedings of the Inagural and First Ethiopian
Horticultural Science Society Conference. Pp 39-44.
Fan, X, Belankenship, S.M. and Mattheis, J.P. 1999. 1-Methylcyclopropene inhibit
apple ripening. Jornal of the American Society of Horti. Science. 124, 690-695.
Jiang, Y. and Joyce, D.C. 2000. The effect of 1-Methylcyclopropene alone and in
combination with polyethylene bags on the postharvest life of mango fruit. Ann.
Appl. Biol. 137:321-327.
Kader, A. 2009. Postharvest losses of fruits and vegetables in developing countries: A
Review.
Kays, S.J. 1991. Postharvest Physiology of Perishable Plant Products. Chapman & Hall.
Lacey, L., McCarthy, A. and Foord, G. 2001. Maturity testing of citrus. Farmnote,
Department of agriculture-Western Australia 3, 1-5.
Lizada, M.C. 1991. Postharvest physiology of the mango – A Review. Third
International Mango Symposium, Acta Hort. 291, 434-446.
MARC (Melkassa Agricultural Research Center).2007. Center profile.
Mattheis, J.P., X. Fan and L. Argenta, 2003. Management of climacteric fruit ripening
with 1-Methylcyclopropene, an inhibitor of ethylene action. Proceeding of plant
growth regulators. Acta Hort. 1:20-25.
Mitra, S.K. 1997. Postharvest physiology and storage of tropical and subtropical fruits.
CAB International. Wallingford, UK pp 1-4
Mitra, S.K. and Baldwin, E.A. 1997. Mango: In postharvest physiology and storage of
tropical and subtropical fruits. CAB International. Wallingford, UK pp 85-122
SAS (Statistical Analysis System). 2002. SAS institute Inc.
Silva S.M., Santos, E.C., Andriana, F.S., Santos, A.f. Silveria, I.S., Mendonica, R.N. and
Alves, R.E. 2004. Influence of 1-Methylcyclopropene on postharvest
conservation of exotic mango culivars. Acta Hort. 645, 565-571.
Sisler, E.C. and Blankenship, S.M. 1996. Method of counteracting an ethylene response
in plants. U.S. Patent No. 5, US Patent Office, Washington, DC.
Sisler, E.C. and Serek. M. 1997. Inhibitors of ethylene responses in plants at the
receptor level: recent developments, Physiol Plant 100. pp. 577–582.
Sisler E.C. and Serek M. 2003. Compounds interacting with the ethylene receptor in
plants. Plant Biol 5: 473–80.
Watkins, C. B. 2006. The use of 1-Methylcyclopropene (1-MCP) on fruits and
vegetables. Ethylene biology. Vol 24, 4, Pp389-409. Department of Horti., Cornell
University, USA
Wills, R., McGlasson, B., Graham, D. and Jojce, D. 1998. Post harvest: An introduction
to the physiology and handling of fruits, vegetables and ornamentals. 4th ed,
CAB International, Wallingford oxon ox10 8 DE UK. pp 40-46.
Zagory, D. and Kedar, A.A. 1988. Modified atmosphere packaging of fresh produce.
Food Tech. 42(9):70-77
Zeweter, Abebe. 2008. Effect of 1-Methylcyclopropene, potassium permanganate and
packaging materials on quality and shelf life of banana (Musa acuminate var
Dwarf Cavendish). M.Sc. Thesis. Alemaya University, Ethiopia.

Postharvest Ripening and Shelf Life of Mango (Mangifera Indica L.) Fruit As Influenced by 1-Methylcyclopropene and Polyethylene Packaging

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Postharvest Ripening and Shelf Life of Mango (Mangifera Indica L.) Fruit As Influenced by 1-Methylcyclopropene and Polyethylene Packaging

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Ethiop. J. Agric. Sci.

Postharvest Ripening and Shelf Life of Mango

University, P.O. Box 138, Dire Dawa, Ethiopia 3Hawassa University,

Key words: Mango Fruits, 1-Methylecyclopropene, Polyethylene Packaging,

Materials and Methods

Treatments and experimental design

Treating With 1-MCP

Physiological weight loss of fruit

Percentage marketability = Number of marketable fruits x100

Total soluble solids

% Acid = (ml NaOH) x (N of the base in mol/liter) x (Eq. wt. of acid)

Results and Discussion

Physiological weight loss

Treatments Storage period on days

LSD* 0.48 0.75 0.74 1.11 0.56 3.86 -

Treatments Storage period on days

Treatments Storage period on days

LSD* 1.78 1.59 1.46 1.29 3.33 -

Treatments Storage period on days

0 100 nLL-1 500 nLL-1 (1-MCP)

Treatments Storage period (days)

Total Soluble Solids

Treatments Total soluble solids (oBrix)

Treatments Titratable acidity (%)

LSD* 0.19 0.13 0.04 0.15 0.22 -

As a summery, both 1-MCP treatment and polyethylene packaging showed significant

You might also like